In a blockbuster report, John Solomon, the former Associated Press and Post reporter, has ferreted out the president’s daily brief that informed him within 72 hours of the Sept. 11 attack that the Benghazi attack was a jihadist operation.

Citing officials directly familiar with the information, Solomon writes in the Washington Guardian that Obama and other administration officials were told that “that the attack was likely carried out by local militia and other armed extremists sympathetic to al-Qaida in the region.”

He adds:

The details from the CIA and Pentagon assessments of the killing of Ambassador Chris [Stevens] were far more specific, more detailed and more current than the unclassified talking points that UN Ambassador Susan Rice and other officials used five days after the attack to suggest to Americans that an unruly mob angry over an anti-Islamic video was to blame, officials said.

Most of the details affirming al-Qaida links were edited or excluded from the unclassified talking points used by Rice in appearances on news programs the weekend after the attack, officials confirmed Friday. Multiple agencies were involved in excising information, doing so because it revealed sources and methods, dealt with classified intercepts or involved information that was not yet fully confirmed, the officials said.

Solomon cautions that there were bits of evidence pointing to a spontaneous attack but, as Eli Lake of the Daily Beast and others have reported, he writes: “Among the early evidence cited in the briefings to the president and other senior officials were intercepts showing some of the participants were known members or supporters of Ansar al-Sharia — the al-Qaida-sympathizing militia in Libya — and the AQIM, which is a direct affiliate of al-Qaida in northern Africa, the officials said.”

How could the president and his senior staff then have allowed (or rather, sent) Rice to go out to tell an entirely different tale to the American people on Sept. 16 on five TV shows?

This report indicates that the president certainly knew that Benghazi wasn’t a rogue movie review gone bad. He had information that plainly spelled out what was later confirmed by additional intelligence. If this information was too confidential to share with the public, at the very least the president and others should not have mislead voters.

This is a full-blown scandal, and in light of this information, the press corps’s slothful indifference to uncovering the truth at Wednesday’s news conference with Obama is all the more shocking. It is time for the president to come clean. The scandal has now enveloped the Oval Office and will define his second term, if not resolved satisfactorily.

The irony of this is that Rice may well have been used as a patsy, unaware that she was sent out to spin a misleading tale. My colleague Dana Milbank recounts Rice’s long-standing inability to get along with others and to be circumspect in her pronouncements:

It’s true that, in her much-criticized TV performance, she was reciting talking points given to her by the intelligence agencies. But that’s the trouble. Rice stuck with her points even though they had been contradicted by the president of the Libyan National Assembly, who, on CBS’s ‘Face the Nation’ just before Rice, said there was “no doubt” that the attack on Americans in Benghazi “was preplanned.” Rice rebutted the Libyan official, arguing — falsely, it turned out — that there was no evidence of such planning. . . . Obama can do better at State than Susan Rice.

Frankly the same could be said of many national security positions at this point. The American people made their choice in November on the president, but it now appears they were duped regarding the real facts concerning Benghazi. What are we going to do about that?

I don't have anything to distort. You didn't explain shit about YOUR business. The first clue you fell flat on your face is the fact the nature of your failed business is completely unknown to anyone in this thread.

I don't have anything to distort. You didn't explain shit about YOUR business. The first clue you fell flat on your face is the fact the nature of your failed business is completely unknown to anyone in this thread.

Don't get all pissy,

I explained, but it doesn't fit your worldview so I understand that. You libs are the ones that have deflected this thread attacking me because you don't like the message in the original post, the president you worship so much has been caught in lies by an AP reporter (I guess better late than never). That's what your deflection has been all about.

I explained, but it doesn't fit your worldview so I understand that. You libs are the ones that have deflected this thread attacking me because you don't like the message in the original post, the president you worship so much has been caught in lies by an AP reporter (I guess better late than never). That's what your deflection has been all about.

See, you don't listen well, it is still around, just adjusted for these bad times.

Isn't there a rule here for asking people for personal info? If I wanted to share that I would but this is the internet and I don't want to share any personal info for security reasons, which by asking would lead to the personal info.

See, you don't listen well, it is still around, just adjusted for these bad times.

Isn't there a rule here for asking people for personal info? If I wanted to share that I would but this is the internet and I don't want to share any personal info for security reasons, which by asking would lead to the personal info.

TGI

You didn't answer the question. Concession acknowledged.

Continue on with blaming the government for your free market failures and your game changer political epiphanies that you have to beg people to take notice of.

Continue on with blaming the government for your free market failures and your game changer political epiphanies that you have to beg people to take notice of.

GEEZ, what part of I don't want personal info out there on the internet that you don't understand? It would lead to personal info and I don't want that out there and there is rules here against that. And this thread is NOT about me which you keep deflecting to.

I'm confused by the Benghazi conspiracy nuts. So, you are all so outraged over four Americans being killed. You think Obama should have came out immediately and given us all the details, but he didn't, for political reasons. Now, conservative icon General David Petraeus has testified that the information on the attacks was classified and was withheld originally so it wouldn't impede efforts to catch the perpetrators of the consulate attacks, and you are upset Obama and other government officials didn't just spill the beans immediately on this classified information? You aren't concerned about getting justice for the Americans killed in Libya?

Is it the case where you are concerned about avenging those four dead Americans, but less so than scoring some political points on our newly re-elected President and our future Secretary of State? Those four Americans are important, but just not that important? How concerned were you when you found that Bush admin had lied to get us into war with Iraq, and that subsequently thousands of American soldiers died in that war?

GEEZ, what part of I don't want personal info out there on the internet that you don't understand? It would lead to personal info and I don't want that out there and there is rules here against that. And this thread is NOT about me which you keep deflecting to.

TGI

I'm not asking you for personal information. I'm asking you to explain how "statism" cost you your business in something other than the vaguest of generalities. That shouldn't be all that difficult.

I'm not asking you for personal information. I'm asking you to explain how "statism" cost you your business in something other than the vaguest of generalities. That shouldn't be all that difficult.

Ok, I've tried to point it out to you several times but I'll try to make it as simple as I can.

The bigger and bigger and more controlling a government gets, the more harm it does to the private sector. That's not hard to understand and we are witnessing that now on how it is hurting the private sector because government has become so large and controlling. We are 16 trillion dollars in the hole and printing money like mad trying to keep all this going and it is just not sustainable.

Ok, I've tried to point it out to you several times but I'll try to make it as simple as I can.

The bigger and bigger and more controlling a government gets, the more harm it does to the private sector. That's not hard to understand and we are witnessing that now on how it is hurting the private sector because government has become so large and controlling. We are 16 trillion dollars and printing money like mad trying to keep all this going and it is just not sustainable.

TGI

^The vaguest of generalities. Pretty much the same as saying "the economy went bad and I need to blame somebody for it".

I'm confused by the Benghazi conspiracy nuts. So, you are all so outraged over four Americans being killed. You think Obama should have came out immediately and given us all the details, but he didn't, for political reasons. Now, conservative icon General David Petraeus has testified that the information on the attacks was classified and was withheld originally so it wouldn't impede efforts to catch the perpetrators of the consulate attacks, and you are upset Obama and other government officials didn't just spill the beans immediately on this classified information? You aren't concerned about getting justice for the Americans killed in Libya?

Is it the case where you are concerned about avenging those four dead Americans, but less so than scoring some political points on our newly re-elected President and our future Secretary of State? Those four Americans are important, but just not that important? How concerned were you when you found that Bush admin had lied to get us into war with Iraq, and that subsequently thousands of American soldiers died in that war?

Thanks for getting back on topic. Petraeus did come out and admit they downplayed the terrorism angle. They didn't have to say who but they still could have admitted it was terrorism, instead of a video, which is now a lie. He did have a political narrative that Bin Laden was dead and Al Quaeda was on the run. This would have gone against that narrative so you tell me if they played politics with the attack. It's not just what happened after, there are many isssues that need to be explained before and during the attack.

Ok, I've tried to point it out to you several times but I'll try to make it as simple as I can.

The bigger and bigger and more controlling a government gets, the more harm it does to the private sector. That's not hard to understand and we are witnessing that now on how it is hurting the private sector because government has become so large and controlling. We are 16 trillion dollars in the hole and printing money like mad trying to keep all this going and it is just not sustainable.

TGI

Strange. Corporate profits are at an all time high.

This didn't answer a question about how it had an impact on *your* business but you won't get into that so no biggie. Not everyone gets to do well in the free market. Don't let Roy read your posts for you.

^The vaguest of generalities. Pretty much the same as saying "the economy went bad and I need to blame somebody for it".

I don't know what else to tell you. I've seen if first hand how the printing of money, devaluing the dollar causing higher prices for many households that has hurt people's spending power and how that impacts many businesses. I guess you'll just have to agree to disagree if you so please.